Gurudwara Opens In Johannesburg

[JSinghnz]

veer ji

maybe you are unaware that they fought to keep their skills up, they fought to stand upright instead of grovelling under the jackboot, later they fought to control the destiny of their homeland and to rid the world of a hateful tyrant... whatever they did , they honoured their homes, families and Guru they did not hesitate to fight on their terms and die on their terms

What homeland are you referring to?

And please do not bring Guru in this as

Our Guru gave us everything to be rulers.

And not join the enemy ranks. Imagine

Sikhs joining the Moghuls as their slaves

to oppress other races like how the

British did.

[jkvlondon]

What homeland are you referring to?

And please do not bring Guru in this as

Our Guru gave us everything to be rulers.

And not join the enemy ranks. Imagine

Sikhs joining the Moghuls as their slaves

to oppress other races like how the

British did.

I'm sorry did Guru ji change his mind about what he told Bhai Kanaiya ? Once the war is over, whether by becoming injured or laying down of arms we become brothers and sisters again.

Yes some chose not to do that , and some did but, surely that is also Karmi appo apni ...

[JSinghnz]

I'm sorry did Guru ji change his mind about what he told Bhai Kanaiya ? Once the war is over, whether by becoming injured or laying down of arms we become brothers and sisters again.

Yes some chose not to do that , and some did but, surely that is also Karmi appo apni ...

Can you please stop confusing yourself?

Omg, where did you get this connection

with laying down of arms and Guru's

message to Bhai Kanaiya. Little knowledge

is really dangerous. Better to admit to

your mistake rather than making more by

trying to justify earlier ones.

[jkvlondon]

Can you please stop confusing yourself?

Omg, where did you get this connection

with laying down of arms and Guru's

message to Bhai Kanaiya. Little knowledge

is really dangerous. Better to admit to

your mistake rather than making more by

trying to justify earlier ones.

slavery ...your definition it seems to be to go to work for an army which is not run by SIkhs , that any Sikh who does is simply an anjaan ghulam...or worse in your eyes is a traitor because he is working for the enemy...

My point was Guru ji said once the active fight is over ...it is over

How many years would you propose the SIkhs would have to wait before they can earn a living by working for the English, a career soldier will want to carry on soldiering it is in his nature... is it so wrong ?

[JSinghnz]

slavery ...your definition it seems to be to go to work for an army which is not run by SIkhs , that any Sikh who does is simply an anjaan ghulam...or worse in your eyes is a traitor because he is working for the enemy...

My point was Guru ji said once the active fight is over ...it is over

How many years would you propose the SIkhs would have to wait before they can earn a living by working for the English, a career soldier will want to carry on soldiering it is in his nature... is it so wrong ?

And from where did you get your point that Guruji said once active fight is over ....it is over. Stop making up fairy tales to make your points.

And the discussion here is that Sikhs then choose to join the enemy ranks as their

slave soldiers rather than fighting on to get back their empire back from the British.

[S1ngh]

My dad helped south african sikhs in late 80's and early 90's in building a gurdwara sahib in durban, natal. He also helped some families to get back into sikhi. There were no sikhs as they were mixed. It was white rule aparthied period.

[proactive]

And from where did you get your point that Guruji said once active fight is over ....it is over. Stop making up fairy tales to make your points.

And the discussion here is that Sikhs then choose to join the enemy ranks as their

slave soldiers rather than fighting on to get back their empire back from the British.

How could the Sikhs have fought on? They would have faced the might of the British empire and the Muslims and Hindus in Punjab would have gladly joined in the fight against the Sikhs. The Sikhs were less than 10% of the population of Punjab and would have had been up against 90% of the population and the British army. There was no unity amongst even this 10%, you had half of the Sikhs under the rule of the Sikh states like Patiala. The Sikhs chose the best course of action for that time which was to work within the system of the empire. No Sikh believes that what the British did to the Sikh empire was a good thing and the British have always betrayed the Sikhs whenever they had the chance. The latest being Thatcher and her aid to the Indian govt in planning Bluestar.

There is no shame in what the Sikhs from the period of 1849-1947 did in joining the army. If anything, having hundreds of thousands of former soliders in Punjab prevented the Sikhs from losing East Punjab to the Muslims. The shame is on the side of the British who betrayed the Sikhs.

I do agree in one respect with you. Sikhs nowadays are too eager to prove themselves loyal to the British even when the same British betrayed them in 1947 and again in 1984. If these British are now facing bombs and terrorism from Muslim terrorists mainly of Pakistani origin then this is just their chickens coming home to roost. It was the British that allowed the wahabis in India to launch a Jihad against the Sikh empire to weaken it in the 1830s.

Also the biggest British sin is that they destroyed Sikh sovereignty and the whole Sikh nation has had to suffer the consequence of this for the last 150 years. We owe the British nothing and if we are in this country then we are only here as guests and once we have our own country then we have the option to leave this country and follow from our secure borders the death of this country as it succumbs to civil war as the bad karma the British have accumulated over the last 300 years comes to bite them on the backside. Who knows maybe we might even send them over a Sikh lawyer to help demarcate Muslim and British areas which can then be partitioned just as they did to our Punjab in 1947.

[JSinghnz]

How could the Sikhs have fought on? They would have faced the might of the British empire and the Muslims and Hindus in Punjab would have gladly joined in the fight against the Sikhs. The Sikhs were less than 10% of the population of Punjab and would have had been up against 90% of the population and the British army. There was no unity amongst even this 10%, you had half of the Sikhs under the rule of the Sikh states like Patiala. The Sikhs chose the best course of action for that time which was to work within the system of the empire. No Sikh believes that what the British did to the Sikh empire was a good thing and the British have always betrayed the Sikhs whenever they had the chance. The latest being Thatcher and her aid to the Indian govt in planning Bluestar.

There is no shame in what the Sikhs from the period of 1849-1947 did in joining the army. If anything, having hundreds of thousands of former soliders in Punjab prevented the Sikhs from losing East Punjab to the Muslims. The shame is on the side of the British who betrayed the Sikhs.

I do agree in one respect with you. Sikhs nowadays are too eager to prove themselves loyal to the British even when the same British betrayed them in 1947 and again in 1984. If these British are now facing bombs and terrorism from Muslim terrorists mainly of Pakistani origin then this is just their chickens coming home to roost. It was the British that allowed the wahabis in India to launch a Jihad against the Sikh empire to weaken it in the 1830s.

Also the biggest British sin is that they destroyed Sikh sovereignty and the whole Sikh nation has had to suffer the consequence of this for the last 150 years. We owe the British nothing and if we are in this country then we are only here as guests and once we have our own country then we have the option to leave this country and follow from our secure borders the death of this country as it succumbs to civil war as the bad karma the British have accumulated over the last 300 years comes to bite them on the backside. Who knows maybe we might even send them over a Sikh lawyer to help demarcate Muslim and British areas which can then be partitioned just as they did to our Punjab in 1947.

The point I am making is the pride some people are having to show how their ancestors were slave soldiers in the British empire.

There is nothing to be proud of what they did and how they were used as cannon fodder by the British.

Of course we cannot re write history but we can learn from it.

Alas, the Sikhs still suffer from even deeper divisions now as compared to earlier and the British

played a very big role in dividing the Sikhs by patronizing the rotten caste system and giving preferential

treatment to one groups of Sikhs over others. This divide and rule policy was quickly adapted by the Congress

party after Independence of India to make sure Sikhs do not unite and challenge the government.

Will the Sikhs ever learn from their past mistakes is a question which is very difficult to answer?

[JSinghnz]

Honestly, I think there's something seriusly wrong with you jsingnz.

You're sitting in New Zealand today not because of what some great clerking some bengali in calcutta did in some office. You're sitting there today because those brave Sikh soldiers laid the foundations for all of us to enjoy the life we have today in English speaking countries. If they had known then that a future generation would spawn an ungratfeul so and so like you I'm sure they would have thought twice.

Like my own family, who proudly served in the British Army, and with it built our Sikh name across the globe, none of them were chained, hooded and tricked into the army like slaves. Each and every one of them made their own free choice to do so. Shame on you....YOU who have done nothing for any generation....Shame on you for enjoying the life they gave to you and yet calling them slaves.

If someone was to go by your illogical thinking, none of the English speaking countries would allow Germans, Italians, French, Americans

to "sit" there because their ancestors tried to destroy the foundations of the English empire.

Do yourself a favour and start thinking before commenting, for a change.

[DailyMail]

JSinghnz,

It's not about slave mentality. It's about injustice, and Sikhs have fought against injustice in whatever guise it may come. The world wars were no different. Infact, today, Sikh regiments form some of the largest contingents of the UN peacekeeping forces around the world. This is directly due to their recognition as brave and loyal soldiers from previous campaigns. Loyalty to an army commander is not to be confused with slave mentality. Sikhs, like any other group, have and will do what is in their best interests. Just like in the Indian mutiny of 1857, the Sikhs provided soldiers and support to the British to quell the rebellion because not doing so would effectively result in the mughuls returning to the throne in Delhi. In return, the Sikhs were rewarded and Sikh regiments were raised - to serve both the Sikh military tradition and the Empire. It is because of this that the Sikh was soon to be found in Shanghai, Tibet, Hong Kong, Vancouver, Auckland, London, Singapore to name but a few. The Sikh was loyal but also strategic - he did what was in best interest and the Brits knew that. Army life provided income,land and status you can't ignore that either. Without sounding too patronising, our ancestors didn't have careers choices that you and I have today. It's very easy for you to be disingenuous and ungrateful 150 years later, sitting comfortably in NZ without understanding the circumstances under which Sikhs made the choices and decisions they did. Loyal, disciplined, fighting injustice - yes. Slaves? No, far too much anakh.